Jerome Bruner and Applying Bruner to education

Jerome Bruner

Background

Bruner’s early work on child development came at a time when thinking in the area was dominated by the behaviourists.  Behaviourism had developed as a means of producing an objective and measurable way of explaining the learning process, based, as it was, on scientific rigour.  Bruner was to apply similar techniques to the study of the internal mental processes involved in learning and was therefore an early pioneer of the cognitive approach to psychology.  Bruner was heavily influenced by the work of jean Piaget and later by the work of Lev Vygotsky.  His eventual theory shows the influence of both.

The child

According to Bruner, the child’s cognitive structures mature with age as a result of which the child can think and organize material in increasingly complex ways.  Here we see influence of Piaget again, but also of the information processing model.  Children are also seen as naturally inquisitive, thirsty for knowledge and understanding.  The child naturally adapts to its environment and abstract thinking develops through action. 

Constructivist theory of cognitive development

Like Piaget and Vygotsky, Bruner believes the child has to learn for itself by making sense of its own environment.  In fact Bruner could be seen as an ‘extreme constructivist’ since he believes the World we experience is a product of our mind.  What we perceive and think of as our World is constructed through our mind as a product of symbolic processes. 

Bruner rejected the idea of stages as popularized by Piaget and to a lesser extent Vygotsky.  Rather than looking at the ages of developmental changes Bruner concentrates more on how knowledge is represented and organized as the child develops. 

Modes of representation

This looks as though its stages but it isn’t!  With stages the child would progress from one to the next and then, crucially, leave the old way of thinking or operating behind.  For Bruner, the earlier ways of thinking are still used later in life where they can be very useful for some tasks.

Modes of representation are the ways (or format) in which the child manipulates information.

1. Enactive (First year)

This is similar to the first half of Piaget’s sensori-motor stage of development.  The child has little in the way of mental faculties so ‘thinking is a physical action.’  Knowledge is what the child can manipulate or do with movements, for example tying knots, pointing etc.  In later life the enactive mode will allow riding a bike, swimming, driving a car and so on.  These are automatic patterns of activity that have been ‘hard wired’ into our muscles.  Thinking about how we do them or trying to explain to others in words how to tie shoe laces or ride a bike is practically impossible because they are enactive.  As for Piaget, the gaining of object permanence is a major qualitative change in the child’s thinking.

2. Iconic (Second year)

This is similar to the second half of Piaget’s sensori-motor and preoperational stages of development.  For the first time the child has mental images that allow it to retain pictures after the stimulus has gone.  Drawing is now possible.  These icons or images are built up from past experience and based on a number of exposures to similar objects and events.  Our image of a cup isn’t based soley on seeing one cup but on seeing many.  However, at present the child lacks the ability to solve problems.

3. Symbolic (six or seven years onwards)

This is similar to Piaget’s concrete operational stage of development.  For Bruner, symbols include words (language), music, numbers and so an.  Anything we use to symbolize something else.  The precise timing of this one depends on the child, particularly its language ability.  For the first time the child can categorise, think logically and solve problems.

Bruner’s main interest was in the child’s transition from iconic to symbolic modes.

A major implication of Bruner’s theory is that cognitive development can be speeded up by training children in the use of symbols.  Some of the studies that follow (e.g. Frank) suggest that this is the case.  Clearly this runs counter to Piaget who believed progress through his stages was biologically determined. 

Culture provides the ‘instructions’ about how humans should develop and these are passed on from one generation to the next.  Bruner clearly disagrees with Piaget’s view of the child as isolated and learning on its own.  The child works with others to develop its framework for thinking and this framework is culture-dependent. Again we see the influence of Vygotsky J

Bruner and Kenney (1966)

Aims- what age children start to use symbolic mode of representation.

Method- children aged 3-7 shown a board divided into 9 squares. On each square was a plastic beaker. Beakers of different sizes & widths, tallest at back & widest on left, each child had to look at the beakers. There was a reproduction test were the beakers were mixed up and the child was asked to put them back how they were.

Transposition test removed beakers and asked them to put them back in a mirror image of the original arrangement

Results

	Reproduction task	Transposition task
Age 5	60%	O%
Age 6	70%	27%
Age 7	80%	80%

Most 5 year olds correctly completed the reproduction test however few under 7 could complete the transposition task, most over 7 could complete both tasks.

The reproduction task was designed to use iconic representation, as the child forms a mental picture and copies it however the transposition task could not be done as it doesn’t look like original arrangement.

Conclusion

The study supports the view that children on average begin to acquire the symbolic mode at around 6 or 7 years of age. The task required the ability to mentally transform the visual information and was dependent on statements such as ‘it gets fatter going one way and taller going in another’ etc.  The children were using language (symbolic mode) to guide their thinking.

Brief biography

Was born in New York in 1915 and at time of writing is still going strong (well still going) at the ripe old age of 94!  Bruner had a difficult childhood with early operations to correct his vision and his father dying when he was only twelve.  The rest of his education was then interrupted by frequent changes of school.  Despite this however, Bruner studied at Duke University and went on to get his PhD in psychology from Harvard University in 1941.  Whilst there he met and worked under Gordon Allport, one of the leading psychologists of his time.

Evidence for the modes

Frank (reported by Bruner 1964)

An ingenious reworking of the classic Piaget water conservation study:

Frank selected a group of 4 to 6 year olds that had been unable to successfully complete the original Piaget test. 

1. They are shown the two measuring cylinders with equal amounts of water and the empty beaker.
2. A screen is placed in front of the apparatus and a line drawn on the screen indicating the water level in the two taller cylinders.
3. Water is poured from one of the cylinders into the beaker (all is still hidden behind the screen)
4. The child is now asked ‘which has more to drink or are they both the same?’

Results of this part of the test:

	Results of unscreened test	Results of screened test
4 year olds	0%	50%
5 year olds	20%	90%
6 year olds	50%	100%

5. The screen is then removed and the child is again asked about which has the most water, the tall thin cylinder or the smaller but wider beaker

Results of this second test

4 year olds: revert back to their original (incorrect answer) that the tall cylinder has more water

5 and 6 year olds generally stick to the correct answer given when the beakers were hidden.

Explanation of findings

In the Piaget original, children can see the whole procedure and so rely on their iconic mode to solve the task.  By screening the procedure Frank was preventing iconic mode and by asking them to describe what was happening was encouraging their symbolic mode.  This more advanced mode of thinking was capable of conservation whereas the lower, iconic was not.

Later, when tested without the screen, the older children were now able to conserve. However, the younger children generally failed, even if they had been able to do the task when it was screened.  This suggests that lessons had not been learned by this group and they had returned to iconic thinking.  Four year olds, it would seem, are mostly unable to acquire symbolic thinking.  This last finding appears to support Piaget’s idea of preparedness.  Regardless of methods used, some children are just too young to progress further

Sonstroem et al (1966)

In a similar reworking of a Piagetian conservation task, children were asked to roll out a ball of plasticine (enactive mode) so it was longer and thinner.   They were asked to watch their own actions (iconic mode) and to describe what they were doing (symbolic mode).  By using all three modes together, the children were far more successful in conserving amount. 

But: Although the above researchers (and Bruner) put this improved performance down to the use of language, other research Furth (1966) on deaf children, seems to suggest that although language helps it isn’t essential for the development of abstract thinking

 

Language

Here we have a major difference with Piaget but clear influence from Vygotsky.

Let’s consider the transition from iconic mode to symbolic mode.  For Bruner this comes about through the mastering of language.  Like Vygotsky, Bruner thinks language accommodates cognitive development and the two then become inextricably intertwined and over time develop side by side each helping the development of the other.  For Piaget language is merely a tool that develops as a result of cognitive development. 

Language is needed for communication with adults and older peers who can facilitate learning.  Similarly it is essential for the scaffolding process. 

Language of course is also essential for thought!

Bruner suggests language training as a way of speeding up the cognitive development of the child, the concept of which would be totally alien to Piaget.

Evaluation

The ability to acquire language is common across all human cultures.  This has led to the nativist theory of language acquisition, basically that the rules for acquiring grammar are hard wired into the human brain.  Linguist, philosopher, political activist and all-round brain box, Noam Chomsky suggested that humans possess a LAD (Language Acquisition Device) that allows us to learn the rules of grammar when we are exposed to human speech.

Bruner however, believes we possess a LASS* (Language Acquisition Social System).  Simply listening to language is not sufficient.  The child needs to be exposed to the mutual eye gazing and turn taking that are needed for conversation.  Language, according to Bruner, needs to take place in a social context. 

Evidence for this is provided by the case of Jim (and other deprived children e.g. Genie).

Jim was born to parents that were both deaf and dumb.  Until the age of three, Jim’s only exposure to language was through the television.  Although he learned speech it was noticeably odd, with him developing his own, unique grammatical characteristics and poor articulation (Sachs et al 1981).  Bruner suggests that this was due to lack of social interaction in the learning of speech. 

However, social interaction doesn’t explain all the complexities of acquisition.  The language we hear is often incorrect, poorly defined, incomplete and full of hesitations, mispronounciations and other errors, yet despite this we still learn to talk!  It also takes place at a very early stage in human development, when other cognitive skills are barely beginning and when complex thought doesn’t exist. 

Culture

According to Bruner our culture determines the sort of person we become.  There ‘cannot be a self independent of one’s culture.’

 pplying Bruner to education

Unlike Piaget and Vygotsky, neither of whom tailored their work directly towards education, Bruner seems to have had the education process in mind throughout the formulation of his theory.  1960 saw the publication of his ‘landmark’ text ‘The Process of Education’ in which he outlined his idea that children, and learners in general, actively construct their own knowledge.

As you would expect from a theory that has borrowed so much from the work of Piaget and Vygotsky, Bruner’s ideas on education are very much an amalgam of the two, and in particular the ideas of Vygotsky.

Basic philosophy

Bruner believes the child needs to grasp the basic principles of a subject not simply acquire a list of facts.  Once these are grasped, the child is less reliant on others, and can go beyond what has been formally taught, and progress to developing ideas of their own. 

Throughout, it is important that the child learns for themselves (influence of Piaget) but also that others, such as adults or more able peers can assist in the learning process (influence of Vygotsky).

Unlike Piaget, Bruner believes that the process of cognitive development can be speeded up with the aid of teachers and, like Vygotsky, believes that scaffolding provided by the more competent is an essential part of the teaching process.  So teachers are seen as important, as is the role of language and communication that facilitates scaffolding and language use (symbolic mode) by the child. 

Cooperative group work (similar to Vygotsky’s peer tutoring) is more important that Piaget’s individual discovery learning.  Evidence for this is provided by Nichols:

Role of the teacher

Sutherland (1992) teachers are ‘obliged to make demands on their pupils.’ 

Teachers are seen as essential in the Brunerian classroom.  They need to be aware of the child’s mode(s) of representation, provide scaffolding and speed up development.  See below for more detail on each of these:

Nichols (1996)

Studied 81 high school students across an 18 week term.

The students were split into 3 groups:

Group 1: 18 weeks of traditional teaching

Group 2: 9 weeks of cooperative group learning followed by 9 weeks of traditional teaching

Group 3: 9 weeks of traditional teaching followed by 9 weeks of cooperative group teaching

The cooperative method involved splitting the 27 students into small groups where they worked together on solving geometry problems.

Motivation of the students was measured before the study, after 9 weeks and 18 weeks

Results

Cooperative group teaching significantly improved motivation with the biggest increase being during the 9 week phase of the co-op teaching.

Conclusion

Cooperative group teaching is good for improving the motivation of students which would seem to support the effectiveness of student-centred learning, the approach favoured by both Bruner and Vygotsky.  

Speeding up cognitive development

Teachers, according to Bruner, should be able to speed up the rate of cognitive development, primarily by improving language acquisition, assisting the transition form iconic to symbolic modes of representation.  According to Bruner, the provision of stimulation by teachers should also increase development, particularly in those from deprived backgrounds.  The thinking here is that those from poorer backgrounds receive less mental stimulation in their home environment so benefit more when it is provided during the education process.  Evidence suggests that children from deprived backgrounds receive less one to one attention from parents and fewer stimulating toys.  In the UK the introduction of the National Curriculum in the 1980s was designed to improve attainment across all groups but particularly those in the bottom 40%.  Teachers have since been expected to increase the rate of cognitive development.   

CASE

CASE (Cognitive Acceleration through Science Education) was designed with this in mind.  Shayer and Adey that devised the program claim success, particularly in boys but only when the program is administered in year 8.  When year 7s follow the program they show little improvement.  Here we have support for i. Bruner: development can be speeded up, but also for ii. Piaget.  Children below year 8 simply are not ready for the progression from concrete to formal thinking regardless of the support given. 

The Spiral Curriculum

This refers to that very annoying habit that teachers have, of constantly returning to topics each year, but teaching them in different ways!  You were probably taught ‘electricity’ in years 3, 5, 7, 9 and 11 and each time your new science teacher would say next week we’re going start ‘electricity’ you would doubtless have moaned since you’d done it before.  However, as you’d realize if you thought back, each time you would have been taught the topic differently, in ever more complex and eventually in more abstract ways. 

Unlike Piaget and his concept of ‘readiness’ that suggests we should only teach abstract concepts when the child has the mental apparatus to cope, Bruner believes any topic can be taught in a meaningful and helpful manner to any child.  Take the example of ‘volume.’

• Baby: let it play with a bucket and some water (perhaps at the beach)
• Pre-school: again play with buckets but this time introducing basic vocabulary such as ‘bucket’, ‘more’ and ‘less.’
• Junior school: Now introduce more complex terminology such as ‘volume’ and ‘conservation.’
• Secondary school: introduction of abstract concepts such as formulae and the removal of concrete examples.

Modes of Representation

In terms of education the influence of the modes is similar to Piaget’s stages, in that the teacher needs to be aware of the mode(s) being used by each child and structure their teaching, resources and activities around these modes.  So for example, early teaching will centre on the enactive mode so activities will need to be hands on and practical in nature.

Taking teaching about dinosaurs as an example: this could involve making models (enactive), watching the BBC’s ‘Walking with dinosaurs (iconic) or an internet search for information (symbolic).

Computers

Computers are very useful in the Brunerian classroom since they can provide scaffolding.  Software on a number of educational programs provide prompts and also a range of ‘help’ menus and facilities so the amount of scaffolding provided can be varied to suit the needs of the developing child.  Children can also work on group tasks using computers facilitating social interaction with all the Brunerian benefits that go with that (cooperative learning, language etc). 

Computers, as any teacher will tell you, also keeps students busy.  This allows the teacher to hover and observe, provide scaffolding when required and intervene and target students that are struggling with additional assistance.